NY Appeals Court Upholds Trump Gag Order
Judge Arthur Engoron imposed a gag order Oct. 3 after former President Donald Trump posted a derogatory comment about the judge's law clerk to social media.
December 15, 2023 at 11:45 AM
3 minute read
A New York appeals court has again upheld a gag order that bars Donald Trump from commenting about court personnel in his civil fraud trial, ruling that the former president's lawyers used the wrong legal mechanism to fight the restriction.
A four-judge panel in the state's midlevel appellate court ruled Thursday that Trump's lawyers erred by suing trial Judge Arthur Engoron, who imposed the gag order in October after Trump disparaged his law clerk.
Instead, the appellate judges wrote, Trump's lawyers should've followed the normal appeals process by asking Engoron to reverse the gag order and then, if denied, fighting that decision in a higher court.
Trump lawyer Christopher Kise said the decision denies his client "the only path available to expedited relief and places his fundamental constitutional rights in a procedural purgatory."
"We filed the petition because the ordinary appellate process is essentially pointless in this context as it cannot possibly be completed in time to reverse the ongoing harm," Kise said.
The appeals court ruling came a day after testimony wrapped in the two-and-a-half-month trial in New York Attorney General Letitia James' lawsuit. Closing arguments are scheduled for Jan. 11 in the case, which threatens Trump's real estate empire. Engoron said he hopes to have a verdict by the end of January.
Trump's lawyers sued Engoron in last month, objecting to the gag order as an abuse of power. They filed the lawsuit under a state law known as Article 78, which allows lawsuits over some judicial decisions.
The four-judge panel ruled that Trump's gag order can't be challenged that way, citing a prior ruling from the state's highest court that characterized such lawsuits as an "extraordinary remedy."
"Here, the gravity of potential harm is small, given that the Gag Order is narrow, limited to prohibiting solely statements regarding the court's staff," the panel wrote.
Engoron imposed the gag order Oct. 3 after Trump, the leading contender for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, posted a derogatory comment about the judge's law clerk to social media. The post, which included a baseless allegation about the clerk's personal life, came on the second day of the trial.
Judge David Friedman of the appeals court suspended the gag order on Nov. 16, citing "constitutional and statutory" concerns, but a four-judge panel restored it on Nov. 30.
Over the trial's first few weeks, Engoron fined Trump $15,000 for violating the gag order. The judge expanded the order, which initially covered only parties in the case, to include lawyers after Trump's attorneys questioned the law clerk's prominent role on the bench.
State lawyers have supported the restriction, saying it was a reasonable step to protect Engoron's staff. A lawyer for the court system tied Trump's comments to an uptick in nasty calls and messages directed at the judge and law clerk.
Michael R. Sisak reports for the Associated Press.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDivided State Court Reinstates Dispute Over Replacement Vehicles Fees
5 minute readSecond Circuit Ruling Expands VPPA Scope: What Organizations Need to Know
6 minute read'They Got All Bent Out of Shape:' Parkland Lawyers Clash With Each Other
Courts of Appeal Conflicted Over Rule 1.442(c)(3) When Claims for Damages Involve a Husband and Wife
Trending Stories
- 1Attorneys ‘On the Move’: Morrison Cohen Adds White Collar Partner; Corporate/Securities Partner Joins Olshan
- 2Jury Says $118M: Netlist Wins Another Patent Verdict Against Samsung
- 3Big Law Communications, Media Attorneys Brace For Changes Under Trump
- 4Will England Accept that Digital Assets Are ‘Property’?
- 5Congress and Courts Are Considering Litigation Financing: Is Disclosure Imminent?
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250